<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Content xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns="urn:blueonionsoftware-com:bloget:runtime:data">
  <text>Effective immediately we are instituting a new policy within R&amp;D with respect to bug fixes and automated test development.  The policy can be summarized as follows:
For high impact bugs the goal is to ensure that an automated test is written to cover the bug whenever feasible. 
This policy applies specifically to those bugs where the Severity field in CharmNT is set to either Critical (value of zero) or High (value of one).  The definitions for these severities have recently been revised and those new standard definitions are now being applied in the bug reviews.  The new Severity definitions are the following:
0.  Critical â€“ Possible patient hazard (e.g., misdiagnosis); possible loss of data.


1.  High â€“ Crashes or hangs in clinically realistic, non-rare circumstances; major feature unusable,  no workaround  available  


2.  Medium â€“ Crash or hang in rare or unrealistic circumstances; major feature unusable, workaround  available ; minor feature unavailable or the defect impairs the systems usability.


3.  Low â€“ Cosmetic issue or minor annoyance.

The developer who "solves" a given critical/high severity bug is responsible for ensuring that either an automated unit or GUI test is created that would fail if the bug was to occur again in the future.  Of course, this would not apply if the original bug was found through an automated test. 
There may be specific bugs where an automated test is not feasible.  An example might be a bug where a study has to be open on multiple workstations simultaneously.  If you feel that a given bug falls into this category, then you must discuss the specific bug with your manager and they must agree to a waiver to this policy for the specific bug.  In cases where they agree, they will add a new note to the bug with the text "Automated test waived - &lt;mgrs name&gt;". 
As today, the developer who "solves" the bug in CharmNT is responsible for entering information in the standard "solved bug" note template that indicates whether or not an automated test was developed for the bug.  The template contains the following questions: "Has a unit test been created for this? If so, which test suite is it in?".  You should follow this by a "Yes", or, by "No" if your manager has approved a waiver.  The template currently refers specifically to a "unit test" but you should also answer "Yes" if an automated GUI test was developed.  This text in the note template will be used to develop some CharmNT queries to track the percentage of bugs that have had automated tests developed for them. 
All automated tests developed must also be incorporated into the nightly builds.  If you develop a test as part of an existing test suite then this should happen automatically.  If new test suites are developed, you will have to work with the engineers responsible for the reporting or syngo Dynamics build procedures to have the new suites incorporated.
As mentioned at the beginning, this policy is in effect immediately.
 
Steve
&lt;/mgrs&gt;</text>
  <last_update>2007-10-04T00:52:33.0720806Z</last_update>
  <source_title />
  <source_link />
  <comments />
  <references />
  <attachments />
</Content>